Physical Activity Monitoring in Patients with Neurological Disorders: A Review of Novel Body-Worn Devices

Abstract

Aim:The aim was to conduct a systematic review to examine the literature reporting the validity and reliability of wearable physical activity monitoring in individuals with neurological disorders. Method: A systematic search of the literature was performed using a specific search strategy in PubMed and CINAHL. A search constraint of articles published in English, including human participants, published between January 2008 and March 2017 was applied. Peerreviewed studies which enrolled adult participants with any neurological disorder were included. For the studies which sought to explore the validity of activity monitors, the outcomes measured using the monitor were compared to a criterion measure of physical activity. The studies' methodological quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) framework. Data extracted from each study included the following: characteristics of the study participants, study setting, devices used, study protocol/methods, outcomes measured, and the validity/reliability of measurement produced. Results: Twenty-three studies examining the validity and reliability of 16 different monitors were included. The identified studies comprised participants with a range of different disorders of neurological origin. The available evidence suggests that biaxial or triaxial accelerometer devices positioned around the ankle produce the most accurate step count measurements in patients with neurological disorders. The findings regarding the reliability and validity of activity counts and energy expenditure are largely inconclusive in this population. Discussion: Ankle-worn biaxial or triaxial accelerometer-type devices provide the most accurate measurement of physical activity. However, further work is required in this field be-

Isotemporal substitution of sedentary time with physical activity and its associations with frailty status

“…The exclusion criteria were neurological impairment (eg, stroke, Parkinson’s disease, or paresis of the lower limbs), cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE] score of <23), 13 and participants with missing data values. Neurological impairment and cognitive impairment were set as the criteria because of conflicting evidence for the validity and reliability of accelerometer measurements, 14 and concern about the reliability of the questionnaire regarding frailty, respectively. Participants with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis who had walking difficulty were not excluded.…”

Sensing Technology to Monitor Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms and to Assess Treatment Response in People With Dementia. A Systematic Review

“…A wide array of new technologies may provide solutions, especially those explicitly designed to support people with dementia and their formal and informal caregivers (Yang and Kels, 2017). The evidence around this has also been growing with research highlighting aspects of active and passive technology used in dementia (Pillai and Bonner-Jackson, 2015;Martinez-Alcala et al, 2016;Giggins et al, 2017;Brims and Oliver, 2018), the impact of safety equipment on wandering in dementia (Lin et al, 2014;Mangini and Wick, 2017), ethical considerations of surveillance technology in dementia (Sorell and Draper, 2012), or the need for real-world evidence-based solutions to conduct clinical trials (Teipel et al, 2018).…”

Remote patient monitoring: a comprehensive study

“…Also, authors highlight that there is very little evidence to prove that care through telemedicine and care in traditional in-person clinic is roughly the same. Giggins et al (2017) review the advancement and usage of novel body-worn devices for activity monitoring of patients with neurological disorders. The paper analyses studies that used subjects with various neurological illnesses such as Parkinson's disease, types of cerebral palsy, Rett syndrome, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, paraplegic participants and patients suffering with spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, post-stroke and chronic stroke patients and found out that accelerometer as the best method to monitor activities of these patients.…”